DesignVerdict
← Back to search
Contested design 009062987-0001

Invalidity · first instance · 2026-06-26

000072551

Contested design: 009062987-0001

EUDR

Outcome

Application inadmissible

The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected as inadmissible and the filing fee is not refunded.

Show verbatim operative text

1. The application for a declaration of invalidity is rejected as inadmissible. 2. The fee for the application for a declaration of invalidity will not be refunded.

CostsNot specified

Parties

Applicant · invalidity challenger

Mingming Chenvia PDF extraction

China (CN)

Suzhou, China

Holder · RCD owner

Lv Cheng Liang

China (CN)

Shenzhen, China

Represented by

METIDA

Legal grounds invoked

Article 25(1)(a)Article 28(1)(b)(vi)Article 28(1)(c)(ii)Article 30(1)Article 52(2)Article 77(2)Article 78(1)

Argument summary

  • Applicant (Mingming Chen, domiciled in China with no EEA establishment) filed an invalidity application against EU design No 9062987-0001 on ground Article 25(1)(a) EUDR without providing a reasoned statement or appointing an EEA representative as required.
  • Holder did not participate; the decision is essentially ex parte.
  • Office found the application deficient under Article 28(1)(b)(vi) EUDIR (no reasoned statement with facts, evidence and arguments) and Article 28(1)(c)(ii) EUDIR (no EEA professional representative named); the Office invited remediation on 15/07/2025 but the applicant did not respond within the time limit.
  • Application rejected as inadmissible under Article 30(1) EUDIR; filing fee not refunded.

Deciding panel

  • MemberEnrico D'ERRICO
  • MemberGaile SAKALAITE
  • MemberRebecca SANTANA DAVIES

Decision files

LanguageTypeSource link
deDeutsch (de)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
esespañol (es)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
frfrançais (fr)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
ititaliano (it)machine translatedDownload original from EUIPO ↗
enEnglishoriginalDownload original from EUIPO ↗

Locarno classes

21.01

Similar decisions

Ranked by shared Locarno class + shared legal grounds + matching outcome. Click a case to view full detail.

CaseDateOutcomeShared groundsLocarnoScore
000130844

vs Lego A/S

2026-06-30Art 25(1)(b)217
000129541

vs ITALTRIKE S.R.L.

2026-06-23Art 25(1)(b)217
000129510

vs ITALTRIKE S.R.L.

2026-06-23Art 25(1)(b)217
000129524

vs ITALTRIKE S.R.L.

2026-06-23Art 25(1)(b)217
000129509

vs ITALTRIKE S.R.L.

2026-06-23Art 25(1)(b)217
000129525

vs ITALTRIKE S.R.L.

2026-06-23Art 25(1)(b)217
000129511

vs ITALTRIKE S.R.L.

2026-06-23Art 25(1)(b)217
000130341

vs Mortensen Software Consulting ApS

2026-05-27Art 25(1)(b)217